Fueled by a superb cast functioning on all cylinders, punctuated by the amazing Viola Davis, Steve McQueen’s follow-up to 12 Years a Slave has a potpourri of elements stirred into a fiery narrative about power, family, loss, politics, race and gender all wrapped up in a heist thriller. Davis plays the lead, Veronica Rawlings, and gives a stand-out performance leading a group of embittered and grieving women (Michelle Rodriguez and Elizabeth Debicki) into a robbery her late husband, Harry (Liam Neeson), had planned to pull with the other women’s husbands. A job-gone-wrong leaves the women widows, placing them in a desperate situation, both physically and financially, and forces them into drastic measures.

On the fringes of this tale are multiple subplots surrounding the political dual of Jack Mulligan (a perfect Colin Farrell), whose family has had a political dynasty and milked their district of Chicago for generations, and the black kingpin and wannabe politician, Jamal Manning (Bryan Tyree Henry), who thirsts for more than just street power. Neither man has clean hands and McQueen goes to great lengths to illustrate that corruption is neither the sole possession of the streets nor the bureaucracy. The agendas for both men fall far short of “the greater good”, which is it’s own political statement in and of itself.

With McQueen at the helm the film isn’t afraid to get dirty, which should be expected at this point considering his other feature films, Hunger, Shame, and the aforementioned Best Picture winner, 12 Years a Slave, have had difficult narratives for the average film-goer. He knows how to make a silent moment deafening by rupturing it with a quick cut or an outburst of emotion, but he’s also a master technician of the long-take, often holding on a single moment for minutes without a cut. Several scenes display the grief these women have endured, both by the loss of their husbands, and by the lives of their husbands. And it’s in these scenes where the film carries the greatest weight and often times the moments are stark and naked within the lens, able to convey love, brutality, pain, sorrow, and joy with only the image. It would be fair to call this an art-house heist film.

There are some negatives that prevent it from great heights. For much of the story the film fails to find an agreeable tone to match it’s ambitions and often times has difficulty balancing characters and subplots. Daniel Kaluuya plays Jamal Manning’s brother and chief enforcer. Kaluuya is so incredible in the role that you seethe at the screen when he shows up while simultaneously savoring every second of his vileness dripping off the screen. It’s pretty obvious that he is enjoying the role. The problem is he gets lost about halfway through the movie, along with Jamal, and only weaves his way into the narrative when a threat is needed to keep our hopes in check. The background of the Manning family is only hinted at and it makes their storyline difficult to place.

On the positive side, another standout performance is by Elizabeth Debicki playing Alice, a Polish-American woman who suffered abuse at the hand of her late husband, played by Jon Bernthal. Her subplot is one of, if not the most, complex within the intertwined characters and she regularly holds her own against the likes of Viola Davis and Michelle Rodriguez.

I believe this is a film worth multiple watches. It teeters back-and-forth between tones and some of it feels out place, but there’s no denying it’s a great film and the finale is exceptionally great. Just don’t go in expecting Ocean’s Eleven.

]]>https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/11/18/review-widows-2018/feed/0Widowswebakiramifune5b858ad1b65a12018-11-04_ent_45371878_I11542226235-widowsHalloween Horror-Thon 2018https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/11/10/halloween-horror-thon-2018/
https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/11/10/halloween-horror-thon-2018/#respondSat, 10 Nov 2018 05:06:45 +0000http://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/?p=1936I’ve always considered myself a fan of horror. I’ve watched the requisite films and franchises dozens of times since my childhood and each year at Halloween time I break them out and watch them all, many of them multiple times. This year Becca and I started a list of horror flicks we hadn’t seen and tried to watch as many as we could. Some of them were generational classics, some were b-movie staples, and a couple were straight grindhouse fodder.

In all, I tallied 32 new movies viewed this Halloween season and I definitely discovered something in watching all those flicks: I’m more of a horror fiend than I ever thought I was. Putting on new and unseen movies was such a breath of fresh air. Watching the same old movies year in and year old had proven to be a bit stale, despite my enjoyment of each of those movies.

So below I’m going to list each film in the order in which we watched them, my personal grade, and a brief synopsis of my feelings about each.

Note – this list only contains new watches and will not include many horror classics you might be expecting. I’ve already seen the old standards many times over. No Freddy, no Jason, no Leatherface. We cool? Let’s go.

1. Creature From the Black Lagoon (1954)

Director: Jack Arnold

Grade

We started with a classic. You’d be surprised how many of the old Universal monster films I haven’t seen and I had been meaning to watch this for a while. My dad always talked about this series when I was a kid but I never sat down to watch it, a situation I was happy to rectify. It’s genuinely atmospheric and the underwater scenes are uniquely tense considering the age of the film. The lifeless eyes of the creature suit are, I’m sure unintentionally, creepy and otherworldly.

It’s dated and not very scary, as was expected, but I can imagine audiences being scared when it came out. It still retains a golden era charm.

2. Creepshow (1982)

Director: George A. Romero

Grade

I wrote a review of it here. Far from my favorite flick this season, but it had enough good moments to make it a worthy watch. I suppose I just expected something different considering it was a Romero and Stephen King collaboration.

3. The Slumber Party Massacre(1982)

Director: Amy Holden Jones

Grade

So much phallic symbolism! The poster alone features terrified women in tiny clothes who look scared to get….drilled. Yeah.

You’re going to notice lots of 80’s slasher movies coming up as this list continues and this one started it off. As you may have guessed, the flick is about a massacre at a slumber party. The killer uses a power drill to skewer young girls, and a few boys. Most interestingly of note, the film was written and directed by women, and feminist women at that, so the symbolism is very intentional. I enjoyed the flick and would happily revisit it next year. It’s dumb in all the ways we expect an 80’s slasher to be and it’s competently made.

4. A Quiet Place(2018)

Director: John Krasinski

Grade

We waited until home release of this one because I knew sound control and quietness were major factors in the story and I certainly wasn’t going to depend on a theater audience to provide that. We were happily rewarded with a great film, as advertised. It’s perfectly tense and the conceit is wonderfully realized in presenting this alternate reality where silence is truly golden.

5. The Return of the Living Dead(1985)

Director: Dan O’Bannon

Grade

I wrote a review here. Definitely one of my favorite flicks from this Halloween season. It isn’t particularly “Halloween-y” because the flick takes place during the Summer (July 3rd to be exact), but with the comedic tone and the excellent zombie effects it fits right in with the season. There are also some great genre actors in the flick – Thom Mathews (Friday the 13th Part 6), Clu Gulager (A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2), Don Calfa (Weekend at Bernie’s), and Linnea Quigley (Night of the Demons– Silent Night, Deadly Night).

6. Alice Sweet Alice (1976)

Director: Alfred Sole

Grade

Another flick bathed in atmosphere that I had heard about for years. The mask the killer wears is perfectly creepy and fits the tone of the flick really well. It’s a solid little mystery with a terrifically unhinged performance from Paula E. Sheppard in the titular role. The grim 70’s vibe imbued in many of the films of the decade is all over this film.

7. Piranha (1978)

Director: Joe Dante

Grade

Cue the Jaws rip-offs! Spielberg’s seminal shark feature spawned innumerable imitators that wanted to cause similar aquatic fears, but none succeeded. Joe Dante’s flick about little flesh eating bastards was likely the best of the bunch and uses the familiar trope of military-experiment-gone-wrong to unleash the fury of the toothy marine creatures. It’s perfectly gory and has all the marks of a Roger Corman production.

8. Humanoids from the Deep(1980)

Director: Barbara Peeters

Grade

More sea-born monsters! The conceit in this flick is there are fish that have been scientifically experimented on (blame science!) and they mutate into half-man/half-fish hybrids that kill men and….rape women (?!) in an effort to reproduce. Yeah, it’s weird. At this point the Jawsrip-offs have gone off the rails and into depraved, exploitive territory. I really don’t see how something like this gets made. It even peppers in a heavy dose of racism and several hate crimes.

9. The Amityville Horror(1979)

Director: Stuart Rosenberg

Grade

A nice atmospheric haunted house story with some solid leading performances in James Brolin and Margot Kidder. It’s one of those movies considered a classic and it certainly isn’t a great movie or on the same level as something like Poltergeist, but it traverses it’s story well and keeps things interesting. I don’t know if this is something that becomes a seasonal watch for me, but I’m happy to have seen it.

10. Trilogy of Terror(1975)

Director: Dan Curtis

Grade

??????????

I’ll be perfectly honest, I barely remember this flick at all. Aside from the part with the little pygmy fellow on the poster, I have no recollection of it. Karen Black stars in all three stories playing different characters, but for some reason only the one story sticks out. I’m not sure if that’s a reflection of my memory or if the rest of the stories aren’t memorable. This may require a re-watch just to figure it out.

11. Killer Klowns From Outer Space(1988)

Director: Stephen Chiodo

Grade

A B-movie cult classic that, when you hear the title, you think, “Well, that sounds ridiculous and terrible.” And I’m here to say, it is ridiculous, but it is not terrible. It’s perfectly ridiculous in every way. Aliens that look like demonic clowns are killing people and wrapping them up in cocoons with cotton candy guns. Yes, it’s all that and more.

P.S. The theme song is unforgettably great and it camped in my brain for the majority of the last month or so. Watch the video here.

12. Sorority House Massacre (1986)

Director: Carol Frank

Grade

Now, we’re back to the massacres. This time the massacre is in a sorority house instead of a slumber party, but it’s pretty much the same deal. Seeing these titles makes you wonder if there was a massive rush to copyright them back in the 80’s, because the movies pretty much write themselves once you have the title, right? A bunch of young girls in a singular location and then a crazed killer crashes the party. This was one of the cheaper looking ones and I don’t remember it too fondly. Happy to have seen it but not likely to revisit.

13. Night of the Demons(1988)

Director: Kevin Tenney

Grade

Another cult film, and one that actually takes place on Halloween night so it was a nice seasonal watch. A bunch of punks gather to have a Halloween party in an abandoned funeral home and perform an unexpected seance that does not end well. The film has terrible acting and some horrendous dialogue, but it’s actually not bad as a whole and it has some creepy make-up effects.

It also features one of the funniest moments I’ve ever witnessed in a horror flick (towards the end, one character makes an amazing choice to save his own ass) and has one of the coolest shots I’ve seen, as well.

14. Madman (1982)

Director: Joe Giannone

Grade

This one is a nightmare. There’s a death scene where one of the characters gets decapitated by the hood of a truck, but other than that there isn’t too much to write home about.

The movie is about a crazed killer who comes out to kill at a nearby Summer camp when his name is called. “Madman Marz!”

It’s telling that even Gaylen Ross (who starred in the original Dawn of the Dead) used a fake name as her credit for this film. The killer is seemingly everywhere and the film lacks any kind of spatial continuity. I know it’s ridiculous to comment on those aspects in a movie like this, but those are the little things that could be fixed to elevate a pretty cliched story into watchable territory. Seeing movies like this makes me realize that films like Friday the 13thgained notoriety because they’re so much more competently produced than the lesser flicks in the genre.

15. The Town That Dreaded Sundown(1976)

Director: Charles B. Pierce

Grade

Here’s another lost 70’s gem that seems to have been forgotten within the genre. It’s not as graphic as most horror flicks so it doesn’t have that feel of other bloodier slashers. The story is based on the real-life Phantom killer that terrorized Texarkana, Texas in the 1940’s and is shot in a way that doesn’t fetish-ize the murders. It’s presented as a realistic account and shows things very matter-of-factly, almost in a documentary style with voice-over detailing.

Also of note, this masked killer precedes other masked maniacs such as Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees, which is especially notable in Friday the 13th Part 2 where Jason wears the exact same bag on his head as the killer in this flick.

It does include one kill with a knife fastened to a trombone (?) that is very questionable and feels misplaced. Other than that, it’s a pretty interesting account of the terror this small town had to endure.

16. The Lost Boys(1987)

Director: Joel Schumacher

Grade

I reviewed it here. I’m happy to have finally seen this one and I promptly went out to buy the blu-ray. The Coreys, Jason Patric, and Kiefer Sutherland are all stand-outs in this moody, and a little uneven, 80’s punk vampire tale.

17. Tourist Trap(1979)

Director: David Schmoeller

Grade

And, we have the weirdness. This creepy little tale about a decrepit old wax museum is a bit of a b-movie darling for horror fans. A young man stops at a nearly vacant old tourist attraction, The Lost Oasis, to get some gas and, as he wanders through the place, he finds himself trapped in a room. The objects in the room begin attacking him in succession and he is eventually killed.

As the rest of the youngsters show up looking for their friend, the owner of this once-thriving museum graciously offers to take in and help them until they can get their truck running. But there appears to be a strange person in a mask with telekinetic powers manipulating objects and killing off the group of friends one by one.

I think I need to give it a re-watch to really be able to have a definitive opinion, but it left a mark for it’s odd tone and sheer creepiness.

18. Prom Night(1980)

Director: Paul Lynch

Grade

Jamie Lee Curtis pops up in another early slasher flick after starring in the seminal Halloween, though this flick has a little blend of John Carpenter’s classic as well as some of Brian DePalma’s Carrie. A group of kids are playing a game of hide and kill, apparently, in an abandoned building when a young girl walks in to join the fun. The kids bully her and she falls out a window to her death, prompting the group to swear never to tell anyone and run away.

The story picks up years later in high school and the kids are still friends and have never told anyone their secret. Leslie Nielsen is the dad and Jamie Lee Curtis plays the grown up sister of the slain young girl. As their Prom night nears, the guilty kids start getting getting knocked off. There is a sub-plot about an escaped mental patient who may be in town and the sheriff and patient’s psychiatrist are trying to find him before he kills more. Sound familiar?

The quality is very low and the characters are an abhorrent mess for the most part. The film never even breathes the same air as Halloween or Carrie even though it borrows several bits from each flick.

19. The Devil’s Rejects(2005)

Director: Rob Zombie

Grade

Rob Zombie the filmmaker is a frustrating proposition. He can go from very high (House of 1000 Corpses) to the very dregs of film (Halloween II). From what I’ve seen, he’s a man who never thought an over-indulgent slice of mayhem was ever too long. Think about that crazy dinner scene in The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. That’s what Rob Zombie tries to flesh out into a full-length movie time and time again, and it only works some of the time.

The heroes in his films are assholes and this flick is like his Bonnie and Clydemixed with Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. But with psychotic, murderous assholes. And in Zombie’s world, the assholes win.

The flick gets bonus points for featuring the great Ken Foree.

20. The Howling(1981)

Director: Joe Dante

Grade

Another Joe Dante entry on the list. This one steers very much clear of 1980’s An American Werewolf in Londonand goes for a more creepy take. I didn’t find the transformation scenes to be anywhere near the same ballpark as the brilliant one in John Landis’ groundbreaking film, but it has some crazy effects and moves the lore of the werewolf away from man-beast and into the realm of shape-shifting entity.

I may need to watch this one again because I was not very enamored with it after the first watch. As it stands, I didn’t enjoy it as much as most.

21. They Live! (1988)

Director: John Carpenter

Grade

The economic effect of the Reagan administration gets a comeuppance in John Carpenter’s late 80’s satire. Rowdy Roddy Piper and Carpenter veteran Keith David stumble upon a pair of magic sunglasses that allow the wearer to recognize the subliminal messages in advertising and to see the beings that are controlling our society with these messages. The sentiment is barely veiled and it is a pretty direct attack on consumerism. The film has built a strong cult base and for good reason. It’s a lot of fun.

22. Night of the Creeps(1986)

Director: Fred Dekker

Grade

Another weird horror/sci-fi blend in the lineage of Invasion of the Body Snatchersand Romero’s zombie flicks. An alien slug crashes on Earth in a space pod and winds up in the brain of a homicidal maniac. The body gets frozen for science and, wouldn’t you know it, years later the body is thawed out during a fraternity prank, releasing the dormant alien. The rest of the film is a hokey b-movie filled with alien slugs and Tom Atkins. And any film with Tom Atkins is good by me, alien slugs or not.

23. Pieces(1982)

Director: Juan Piquer Simon

Grade

Oh, man. Where do I begin with this one? The tagline says it all: IT’S EXACTLY WHAT YOU THINK IT IS!

An exploitation film if there ever was one, Pieces is about a killer who removes body parts from his victims in order to recreate a jigsaw puzzle he’s been obsessed with since he was a boy. It’s a depraved movie in the vein of old grindhouse cinema, with the primary goal of taking an established genre set-up and twisting it to the most hellish version.

Much the same way Maniac was, the killer in Pieces has mommy issues, though in William Lustig’s film they employ a unique narrative that actually follows the psychopathic killer as the main character. Here we get the usual woman-being-stalked-by-faceless-figure which leads to a ho-hum, clichéd murder. Though, not so clichéd, one kill features a woman getting chainsawed in half and, rest assured, we get that imagery in close-up. So, yeah….classy stuff.

24. Final Exam(1981)

Director: Jimmy Huston

Grade

By now, if the formula isn’t incredibly apparent, it should be. We have a bunch of college kids, many of them unbearable douchebags, preparing for their…final exams! But, guess what? There’s a killer on the loose! The only saving grace for this flick is that there is actually a decent person or two in the bunch to balance out the ensemble of horrible, one dimensional people. The jocks are assholes, the pretty girls are bitches, and the nice kids are insufferable (and it makes you wonder why some of these “nicer” people are friends with these awful people in the first place). The nerdy kid with wit is named “Radish” and is played by Joel S. Rice, and it’s safe to say he is the only character you’re rooting for.

As it turns out, the killer is just randomly picking people off, presumably because they are vapid and merely a means of justifying a run-time of 89 minutes. The only pleasure in watching this film is waiting to see how bad these incorrigibly terrible people are going to be slain. So, the formula works again.

25. The Prowler(1981)

Director: Joseph Zito

Grade

The film starts with a girl named Rosemary breaking up with her boyfriend via letter while he is stationed overseas in WWII in 1945. Now, if ever there was a trigger moment in a slasher film, I believe we’ve found the peak of the mountain. The genre features psychos killing their siblings, killing in the name of mommy, killing their own children, killing for no damn reason, and too many more who kill because you spoke their name, stepped on their lawn, knocked on their door, opened a puzzle box, etc. But if you’re serving a tour of duty in the worst war the world has ever seen and your significant other breaks up with you in a letter….oh, man. Needless to say, Rosemary and her new beau get shanked with a pitchfork by a man wearing Army fatigues.

So, yeah, cut to several years later and students (always punishing the students) are holding the first Graduation Dance since that tragic murder (a la My Bloody Valentine) and guess who shows up. G.I. freaking Joe. The flick is pretty good and is notable for two reasons. First, we are treated to a performance by none other than Hitchcock veteran Farley Granger (Strangers on a Train, Rope) in a silly little slasher flick. And, secondly, the kills and effects are actually quite clever and expertly done. Horror effects legend Tom Savini has pointed to this film as his finest work, which is saying A LOT, even if he did recreate his own work from Maniac in the shot-gun/head exploding scene. Some great stuff in here.

26. The Mutilator(1984)

Director: Buddy Cooper

Grade

These titles are the best.

To start, a young boy is cleaning his father’s rifles (which he is expressly forbidden to do) as a surprise for his father on his birthday. While he’s disobeying this order, he shoots and kills his mother. Dad comes home and is less than pleased with his son’s gun cleaning technique.

Several years later, the boy is grown up and we’ve found out that the tragedy has caused his father, Big Ed, to go off the deep end. But, he’s still dad, so when he asks Ed Jr. to come up to his beach house and shut it down for the season, Jr. agrees and takes his friends along with him. Once they get to the beach house, things seem a little weird and before you know it people are dying in fairly bloody ways.

The flick is forgettable, except for the comedically insane way in which Big Ed keeps coming back in the end. A pretty obvious influence on Broken Lizard’s Club Dread.

27. Stripped to Kill(1987)

Director: Katt Shea

Grade

Not so much a horror flick, but rather a mystery thriller. With strippers.

A stripper is burned alive and a detective has to infiltrate the strip club the girl worked at to get some details for the investigation. There’s no real hijinks, as you would normally expect in a fish-out-of-water scenario, but the detective is a terrible stripper and when the police chief finds out how undercover she is they pull the plug on the detail. But, naturally, subordination isn’t in play and she stays “undercover” to finish the case.

Like I said, it’s not a horror. The most horrific moment is when a girl is murdered and the killer fastens her to the underbelly of a semi-truck to drive the body away. It’s not great, but it’s not the worst flick on this list.

28. Chopping Mall(1986)

Director: Jim Wynorski

Grade

Here we get to combine elements of Short Circuit, Dawn of the Dead, and slasher films all in one. We have maniacal robots, a closed shopping mall, and a group of dumb kids just trying to party.

The mall is implementing new security robots to enforce policies and police against mall crimes (that’s a thing, right?) Of course the mall gets struck by lightning and the robots go from peaceful protectors to killing machines. This is not good news for the group of youngsters trying to party in the closed stores. The rest writes itself, folks. Pretty darn forgettable but it’s interesting that these unkillable killing machines with no conscience are really no different from their human counterparts in other slashers.

29. Halloween (2018)

Director: David Gordon Green

Grade

I reviewed it here. The movie is good, but not great. I’ve seen some nitpicks about the violation of Michael’s mythology, but they are only nitpicks and they don’t hold much weight when you break them down. It’s pretty easily the second best movie in the franchise and that’s good enough for me.

30. Dolls (1987)

Director: Stuart Gordon

Grade

This is a good one! When I read it was a horror movie about killer dolls I assumed it was something of a Child’s Playand Puppet Masterhybrid mess, but thankfully I was wrong. A lot of the good in this movie is credited to director Stuart Gordon (Re-Animator) and the animation of the dolls. It’s really well made and it’s properly creepy. Sadly, the characters are a mess and so overtly cartoonish at times that it brings the film down to Earth several times. Again, the wicked need to be punished and we can’t wait to see it!

31. Night of the Comet(1984)

Director: Thom Eberhardt

Grade

Another good one! A comet is going to be skirting by the Earth and everyone is having a comet party to celebrate the celestial event. The party’s over when the comet reduces the population of the planet to piles of dust, leaving the atmosphere with an apocalyptic amber hue, and only those who were inside steel rooms during the night of the comet (get it?) are still alive. There are some who suffer from mild exposure to the comet and those people slowly turn into zombies.

Two of the survivors are sisters who were raised by their military dad and are pretty well equipped to survive. They meet a dude, then run into some other dudes who have been exposed to the comet and are claiming the mall as their own, which leads to a fun stand-off. Eventually they get in contact with some scientists who have been sheltered in an underground lab, and these people are not nice. Blame science! It’s 80’s hokey nonsense, but it’s entertaining and just ridiculous enough to keep you smiling.

32. Black Sunday(1960)

Director: Mario Bava

Grade

This one is great. It’s the feature directorial debut of Italian giallo filmmaker Mario Bava and it is a masterwork of light and shadow and spatial beauty. Every frame could be plucked out and put on canvas in gorgeous black and white and hung up on the wall as an eerie, gothic painting.

The story involves a witch who was murdered by her own brother and vows to get revenge on their descendants. 200 years later, a pair of traveling doctors stumble upon the tomb of the witch and they inadvertently awaken her. Thus, the witch begins her revenge.

Story aside, the film is beautiful with stark light and engulfing shadow filling each frame. Bava’s use of depth and space in his framing is astounding and adds such an atmosphere to the world he is building. I recommend this highly if you’re a film nerd or just love gothic films.

]]>https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/11/10/halloween-horror-thon-2018/feed/0c6815373-cfb5-40e1-8d2e-71b4a8665429_560_420akiramifunesevenstarsCreature-from-the-black-lagoonfivestarstp0004c_SP_DPGate_CoversixstarsR-3574373-1335848167.jpegeightstarsMV5BMjI0MDMzNTQ0M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMTM5NzM3NDM@._V1_eightstars91JkeA3879L._SY445_sixstarsMV5BN2NhZDNjMmItM2I0Ni00NDM3LWE1YWQtZDg1MWQzYjJlMDM5XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjc1NTYyMjg@._V1_sixstarspiranha-movie-posteronestarhumanoidssixstars91SsugmAqvL._SY445_TRILOGY-OF-TERROR-e1355958338923eightstarso4GC_r42CzM.movieposterthreestarsf335500a07cb18de1b97f0931aef5af8fdd51752_hqsixstars51KRFTK3SZL._SY445_Night Of The Demons (9)twostars220px-Madman-postersevenstarstown_that_dreaded_sundown_poster_01eightstars516+-DdP1yLsixstars220px-Tourist_Trap_one-sheetfourstarsb84b8d787f717e6db4be309cb2df3fd8sevenstarsfull_thedevilsrejects-20691__84027.1512009827.1280.1280fivestarshowlingeightstarstumblr_kvtfzjS22B1qa3nkyo1_500sixstars800full-night-of-the-creeps-posterthreestarsil_570xN.1039066559_ru7tthreestarsMV5BOGY3NTc1OTktNmQ4Ni00YTU2LWI3YjktYzBkZDhlYjUzZGJmXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_UY1200_CR73,0,630,1200_AL_sevenstarsMV5BYWE2YjExOTMtMjBkMy00MjFkLWFjYjgtZjc1YzM1ZGMxZWQzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_UY1200_CR80,0,630,1200_AL_twostarsizS8S9efivestarsMV5BZTlmOGRlZDEtYmMyOC00MmI2LThmZmItYjlkYzQwNTJiNTY0XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjQ2MjQ5NzM@._V1_.jpgfourstars51kMneNFrSLeightstars61PMwTwTnaL._SY741_sevenstarsMV5BMTA4YWZiMDMtZTYzYi00N2EzLTk0NDctZGE1YWZjNjM1N2I1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_sevenstars61a4GZLHAFL._SY679_ninestarsblack-sunday-movie-poster-1960-1020430143Review: HALLOWEEN (2018)https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/10/22/review-halloween-2018/
https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/10/22/review-halloween-2018/#respondMon, 22 Oct 2018 04:49:34 +0000http://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/?p=1926First things first: it was exhilarating to see a new HALLOWEEN film….in the theater….during the month of October….produced with a skill and an affection for the spirit of the series. It’s been so long since there has been an iteration of this 40 year old franchise that made me feel that way. I was too young to see most of the early films in theaters – my first theatrical encounter with Michael Myers was at the age of 14 when I saw HALLOWEEN 6: THE CURSE OF MICHAEL MYERS. I’m happy to be alive and able to comprehend the newest form of evil in this latest installment.

I’ll just say this: the movie is good. It has a nice little slasher story, lots of brutality, only a few cheap jump scares, and a wonderfully creepy atmosphere. It bares the weight of the original on its back and it holds up well. It lacks the visual panache of a John Carpenter film, but this isn’t a John Carpenter film and that’s not a bad thing.

With all that being said, this movie and this review is not about all that. Read on.

*There are spoilers ahead. Ye hath been warned*

Partners in production, David Gordon Green (Director, co-writer) and Danny McBride (Producer, co-writer), have erased the previous tales of Michael Myers’ murderous rampages chasing long lost relatives around Haddonfield. The sequels are gone and, instead, they have focused intently on the aftermath of John Carpenter and Debra Hill’s original from 1978. The Michael-as-personification-of-evil angle has evolved and the idea of purpose and the ramifications of a traumatic event are given incredible depth.

Laurie Strode (the amazing Jamie Lee Curtis) lives on but the events of the original film have altered the trajectory of her life and the lives of her family, most notably those of her daughter and granddaughter. Laurie lives in a secluded home that doubles as a weapons training compound and is rigged as a kind of barricaded, booby-trapped safe-house. She has very little contact with her daughter, Karen (Judy Greer), and her granddaughter, Allyson (Andi Matichak) and her personal relationships have crumbled in light of the tragedy that befell her and her friends on the night of October 31st, 1978.

Real life events and the #MeToo movement were undoubtedly an ignition for the story of a damaged Laurie Strode trying to make sense of a life that was blasted off track by the impulses of a deranged man. Thankfully, the sister-brother angle explored in the sequels is contextually brushed aside as nonsense in one of the many meta moments that reference the sequels or the twisted nature of the franchise as it exists in our world.

Laurie needs no relation to the killer to make her a victim. Is it not more scary that she was merely a normal high-school girl who got sucked into the vortex of a murderer’s impulse and her life became inexplicably twisted around the bloody kitchen knife used to murder her friends? She has become a bad ass and a heroine who stands toe-to-toe with other heroines of the action genre. Most horror heroines barely outlast the killer and gather strength from the loss of their friends and family, but Laurie has emboldened herself by channeling her pain and trauma. She has spent years preparing for this fateful encounter and when the going gets tough, Laurie hops in her pick-up truck and goes hunting. She has strength as a result of her pain. If there ever was a discussion about who the best horror final girl is, HALLOWEEN closes the book and forever cements Laurie atop the mount. No longer is she the victim, she is empowerment personified.

Meanwhile, our main hero from the original, Dr. Sam Loomis, is no more and Michael is under the care of Dr. Sartain (Haluk Bilginer) at Smith’s Grove, where Michael has resided for the past 40 years. Utilizing one trope that stays true to the franchise, Michael and some other residents of the mental institution are being transported to a different facility and, not so surprisingly, everything goes wrong. The intentions of Dr. Sartain are uncertain and it becomes quite obvious that he harbors an obsession for the type of compulsion Michael feels. His intentions are so questionable that it is never quite explained how Michael manages to break free and overthrow the bus, but there appears to be a smoky overseer in the form of Dr. Sartain.

A decent part of the film explores the psychological effect these horrific events have had upon the lives of the people involved, and also upon those who came into contact with either the people or the events, themselves. The local policeman, Officer Hawkins (Will Patton), was a first responder back on Halloween in 1978. There are a pair of investigative reporters who are enraptured with understanding the outcome of such a horrifying tragedy so they can episodically report it on their podcast. And this is without mentioning the crumbled remains of the Strode family and the macabre infatuation of a doctor who becomes obsessed when he stands too close to evil.

There is a subplot within the narrative about Allyson trying to prove her boyfriend is a good guy by bringing him to dinner to meet her parents. Unbeknownst to the rest of the family, she also invited crazy old Grandma Laurie to dinner, who promptly has an emotional breakdown at the table. And Allyson’s mom, Laurie’s own daughter, tells her, “This is why I don’t invite her”. Because the affected are seen as the afflicted we’d rather not include at the dinner table.

Later on that night at the school Halloween party, Allyson catches her boyfriend kissing another girl and she bolts. This event is shortly followed by a guy pal of Allyson’s, perpetually in the friend-zone, walking her home to make sense of all the mess, only to wind up putting a move on her and forcing Allyson to defend herself. These events are common, not only in film, but in real life, and they are followed by the same excuses: “It wasn’t what you thought” “I was drunk” “I thought you wanted it, too” “Please don’t tell anyone”. I initially didn’t like this sub-plot as it seemed merely as a means of shoe-horning in a little teenage melodrama in the middle of the adult drama to appease the younger crowd, but it plays so well within the metaphor of the ever-morphing evil present in our lives each day.

The difference between Michael Myers and these other characters is just this: they have a face and can act like trustworthy friends and lovers. Michael represents the faceless menace stalking in the darkness, but he could just as easily be the person who professes their love to you, the person you confide in, the person you thought would protect you.

We live in a society where victims are treated like weirdos and we tell them “just let it go” because it’s easier to forget and look away and say “what’s wrong with you?” than it is to face the problem head on. HALLOWEEN gives us a story about facing the cause of your pain, using the strength you gain from surviving, and saying, “no longer am I your victim”.

Michael isn’t the boogeyman waiting for you in the dark, he’s the pain you can’t escape who comes back to finish the job. Only this time….he doesn’t stand a chance.

It’s surprising that I had never seen THE LOST BOYS until recently. I’m a child of the 80’s and this is most definitely an 80’s movie, with the prevalent punk culture motif represented in the titular Peter Pan vampire gang, along with the first screen pairing of the 80’s staple known as The Corey’s. The decade was a hot bed of horror comedy, undoubtedly fueled by the exhaustion of genre films in the years preceding. THE LOST BOYS, MONSTER SQUAD, AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON, RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD took familiar horror characters (werewolves, zombies, vampires) and injected humor into the mix. Landis’ landmark werewolf flick delivered a prescient mixture of humor within the monster movie structure that set the bar for comedy in the horror genre. The mixture in this flick is, admittedly, different but still effective.

Romanticizing vampires has been a staple of the character since the beginning. They’re hypnotic and alluring: creatures of the night. The mark of the vampire, made by biting the neck of the victim to drink their blood, is a macabre romantic gesture; it’s pure blood lust. Vampires represent the opposite of the human experience: they never age, they are nearly invincible, they possess strength and other powers no human has, and they spend their days in hiding and their nights on the prowl.

I would argue that rarely are they presented as sexual as they are in THE LOST BOYS. The inciting incident is a classic, sexually charged boy-meets-girl moment, and the ensuing courtship is between the boy, Michael (Jason Patric), and the vampire pack, led by David (Kiefer Sutherland).

Part of the A plot involves Michael’s younger brother, Sam (Corey Haim), and a duo of vampire hunting pre-teens, the Frog bothers (Corey Feldman and Jamison Newlander), who work at a comic shop. The boys act as both the harbinger and the comedic relief with their frank bravado in the realm of vampire hunting. (Sort of reminds you of the fake machismo young boys have when discussing female conquests with their friends, right? Hmmmm.) The motif of allure and sexual tension works well within the conflict between the vampires and Michael, but

whenever we cut back to the young boys and their obsession with hunting vampires the tone shifts and switches the focus of the story. In the end, it works because they all need each other to resolve the conflict, but it takes a foggy path to get there.

Aside from the muddled tone, this is a solid vampire story that doesn’t go exactly the way you think it will and it works well because of the small scope of the story. There’s the vampire element and then there’s the family who has just moved in with their eccentric grandpa in Santa Clara “The Murder Capital of the World”. That’s the extent of it. The story doesn’t venture outside of the small world it creates. There’s no plot for world domination or human extinction, there’s just a conflict between a family and the vampires. Sometimes simple and sweet, with just the right mixture of cool, is enough to tell a good story.

The production value on the film is surprisingly shlock-y and is certainly a low-budget product of the times. The skits are more like cast-offs from Tales From the Crypt, and perhaps could have benefited from an occasional interlude from the Crypt Keeper, himself.

It starts with a young boy being chastised by his father for reading horror comics. The film seemingly brings these comic panels to life and, undoubtedly, the resulting skits resemble images splashed on comic book pages. Episodes include a tale about a cursed family being picked off by the living corpse of a murdered patriarch, the aforementioned revenge yarn, the atrocious skit featuring a dumb hillbilly played comically bad by Stephen King, a lengthy tale about an ancient creature in a crate wreaking havoc on Adrienne Barbeau and Hal Holbrook, and then the last bit featuring a senile scrooge with a mean streak and a bug problem.

I won’t say the movie is bad, but there are some bits that should have ended up at the bottom of a flaming dumpster. The episode in the middle of the film about a slighted husband seeking revenge on his cheating wife and her lover is diabolically wonderful. Leslie Nielson is perfectly sadistic as the man exacting a psychotic revenge plan on Ted Danson and his wife. The resolution of the story isn’t handled particularly well, but it’s still a mostly satisfying horror tale. I could have watched an entire movie about this particular story and it certainly is the pinnacle of this film.

I know there are sequels in this series, but I think 1 is enough for me. It’s a shame because horror anthologies can truly shine when done well. This film isn’t bad, it just doesn’t leave you wanting more.

]]>https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/09/09/horror-thon-review-creepshow-1982/feed/0Creepshow-Middle-Imageakiramifunecreepshow016_origcreepshow-image-2_758_426_81_s_c1Horror-thon Review: THE RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD (1985)https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/09/09/horror-thon-review-the-return-of-the-living-dead-1985/
https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/09/09/horror-thon-review-the-return-of-the-living-dead-1985/#respondSun, 09 Sep 2018 18:04:50 +0000http://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/?p=1905I have to admit when I first heard about this title years ago I assumed it was a cheap sequel to George A Romero’s classic The Night of the Living Dead (1968). While it does owe a debt to that seminal zombie film, Dan O’Bannon’s update carves out its own place in the zombie canon by shedding the social conscience that made Romero’s film so important and instead focuses on the fun and entertainment value. If you took Romero’s film and brushed off the real world commentary and plugged it directly into the excesses of the 1980’s culture, you’d get this film. It’s violent, gory, comical and downright insane.

This film is a product of the familiarity with tropes of the genre and actually references The Night of the Living Dead in the same way films like Scream meta-textually reference its predecessors within the story. It uses common set-ups of the genre to infuse comedy as well as create new rules. O’Bannon’s zombies can run, talk, and reason and often manage to out-think the humans. These zombies aren’t mindless vessels skulking around the landscape, they are actual characters who feel and are able to articulate their purpose: devour brains to quell the pain of decomposing.

The characters and situations are familiar but are spun into genuinely unique territory by utilizing a ridiculous humor throughout the screenplay, from the outlandish 80’s punks to the macabre mortuary attendant and bumbling medical supply company staff. The interactions of these groups are insanely fun to watch and inject an energy to the film. This film is dialed to 11 in the best way possible.

The obvious, and heavily promoted, hook for the Mission: Impossible franchise is that its star, the legendary Tom Cruise, is constantly putting his body on the line for the stunt-reliant films. The first two films were essentially spy thrillers with twists and turns and some outlandish (let’s face it, ridiculous) action set-pieces, but starting with the third installment the series went darker and developed a formula for the rest of the films to follow:

Ethan Hunt screws up an assignment…

Devises a plan to correct the mistake outside of IMF protocol…

Corrects the mistake but in turn is thrown into a larger conundrum…

Gets double-crossed and, usually, disavowed…

Assembles a small team, as by this time he can’t trust anyone…

Comes up with a new plan involving an extraordinary, death-defying stunt…

Saves the world…

Rinse, repeat

Usually following a formula is a death sentence for a film, especially one with multiple installments. But this series manages to use the formula and circumvent the familiarity of the plot by ratcheting up the tension to near fatal levels.

This is where Mission: Impossible – Fallout slams it home. When I say my heart was beating out of my chest at the end, I’m only slightly exaggerating. I had to turn to my girlfriend during the third act and comment on my pulse, which was unlike anything I’ve ever felt in the cinema. And I’m not saying the film is the greatest thing because it generated this kind of primal reaction from me, but it is a testament to the pacing, editing, staging, and direction of a film whose paramount goal is to thrill you. I’m also not exaggerating when I say the third act of this film is the most thrilling (and terrifying) thing I’ve ever experienced in a theater in my life. No bullshit.

The man has two loaded guns dangling off his shoulders….and now he gets this??

The twists and turns of a film do not usually excite me. The obsession with plot twists is boring and hopefully something that diminishes sooner rather than later. But, for a spy-thriller, plot twists are essential and this movie is rife with them. It doesn’t take a genius to guess fairly early on that some people will turn out to be something other than what they seem to be. It’s an unavoidable cliche and a staple of spy films. But this film doesn’t necessarily try to hide these twists in order to pull the rug out from under you. There’s a subtle touch of Hitchcock in allowing your audience to be aware of the imminence of something bad about to happen, but letting the narrative play out until the tension is at a fever-pitch. The film doesn’t try to assault your expectations with plot gimmicks, it follows the formula so succinctly that it allows the audience to be in on the conspiracy without detracting from the experience.

Conspiracy…..?

There is a discussion to be had about the politics of the film, involving government agents and assassins who seemingly stand on opposite sides of an invisible divide. The protagonist is a good-intentioned, albeit occasionally insolent, agent with several miles on the odometer and a sense of what needs to be done in order to preserve his beliefs. The antagonist is an anarchist who believes in the destruction of social, economic, and political structures as a way of resetting the world clock. Through suffering, there can be peace. This should sound familiar as it has become a common theme in recent cinema, e.g Thanos in Avengers: Infinity War.

The only thing I can say is, this franchise has grown into something more than we ever thought it could be and survives in a landscape riddled with CGI superheroes and villains. I’m the first person to buy a ticket to the next MCU movie, but there is a disconnect in knowing that, not only are the characters unnatural, but they are not actually doing the things we are seeing. Watch a behind-the-scenes featurette on the making of a Marvel movie and you can see the green screen photography being used to insert the characters into a world that isn’t there.

This is proof that Tom Cruise has gained the ability to fly

Mission: Impossible is not that kind of movie. There is an indexical relationship to reality through the use of practical stunts; there is no magic or trickery, aside from digitally erasing a safety harness or stabilizing cable. The actors and props exist in real time and are not digitally inserted into the frame. Tom Cruise is flying a real freaking helicopter! Tom Cruise was dangling off the side of a mountain! This sublimation of action and actors together is what sets the Mission: Impossible series apart from the current slate of action films.

Paul Schrader’s religious study of human frailty is heavy on ideas and questions of faith, sacrifice, and theories of predestination, but he doesn’t explore these questions thoroughly and shows his hand too frequently. I’ve read that Schrader was inspired to make the movie from his Calvinist upbringing, and it could be argued that the film is as much an attack on organized religion as it is an endorsement.

*I’m going to discuss some plot points that are not expressly evident in the film synopsis and some elements that unfold that are important to the discussion of the themes, so if you don’t want to read any plot details stop now.

The protagonist in First Reformed is an ailing, emotionally wounded pastor, Reverend Toller (Ethan Hawke), who is an amalgamation of loss and pain. Reverend Toller exists mostly in isolation, living a solemn life in a sparse church house and presiding over a congregation of very few. His church is only kept alive by the support of the financially successful church nearby, Abundant Life, presided over by Pastor Jeffers (Cedric Kyles aka The Entertainer), whose moral compass is questionably absent in the face of financial survival (I’ll come back to this).

One day after church, Reverend Toller meets a pregnant parishioner, Mary (Amanda Seyfried), who requests counseling from the reverend for her distraught husband, Michael (Philip Ettinger). Michael is an environmental activist who has recently been released from detainment for participating in protests over destruction of the rainforest.

It’s this interaction that provides the theological basis for the film’s politics. The two men pose dialectical arguments for predestination and faith and questions of choice versus preordination. Michael wants to terminate Sarah’s pregnancy because, as an environmentalist, he understands the predicament our world is in and feels guilt about bringing a life into a world that is destined to become extinct. As a priest, Reverend Toller imparts theological rebuttals to these arguments, but these answers only lead to more questions.

Contextually, the arguments are made all the more enlightening because of the mental and physical state of Reverend Toller. We find out as the movie moves along that he was once married and had a son who was shipped off to the military, in the family tradition, and dies in Afghanistan. As a result, Reverend Toller’s marriage dissolves and he finds the priesthood as a perfect fit for his lonely despair. He finds a small amount of safety in faith and through his past suffering he is able to impart counsel to others. To top it off, he is a closeted alcoholic who engaged in a sexual transgression with the choir mistress and is suffering from what is insinuated to be stomach cancer.

Just before he is about to meet with Michael for a second time to continue their discussion, Michael commits suicide.

When I say that the film is built to tear down this man of faith, I mean it. But is this necessary to present the ideas of faith? Schrader clearly wants to question the weight of faith versus the potential of action. Michael believes that we must DO something to save ourselves, while religion teaches us to have faith in the Lord’s plan. Reverend Toller is the symbol for both God and man, so what is Schrader trying to express about the frailty of each?

If Reverend Toller wasn’t damaged, would the arguments carry less weight? Films about priests tend to highlight their humanity and shortcomings in the face of their religious persona as a “Holy Man”, but this one uses these faults to create something more extreme. Reverend Toller is a flawed man, more flawed and broken than most, and it seems to be the intent of the film to show that continued faith only causes more pain. The more we choose faith over physical discourse, the further we fall.

Once this has been established the film poses the most rudimentary of religious questions: why do bad things happen to good people? The depth of discussion is shallow and is presented more as a challenge to those of faith than anything of substance. It’s more like, how does someone of faith deal with this basic question? We’re left with the lingering effects of the insinuation that God is not helping us. This dialectical argument of faith versus action is ever-apparent and skews Reverend Toller to be a person of action.

Does this mean that he abandons faith? It’s hard to say.

Another factor that is not well handled is the economical factor and the constant argument that the church is merely a financial institution. Pastor Jeffers is in the back pocket of the local company that poses a major environmental hazard, Balq Industries. It should come as no shock that the CEO, Edward Balq (Michael Gaston), is a significant financial contributor to Abundant Life. This is a ham-handed way of weaving the issue of Michael’s suicide into the partnership between the two churches. Balq sees Reverend Toller’s involvement with Mary after Michael’s death as a complicit political act of defiance against his company.

Before you know it, Reverend Toller is a climate change advocate who spouts scientific evidence at both Balq and Pastor Jeffers in between quoting scripture. Huh?

Sadly, through this interaction, class politics are also brought into the equation. Reverend Toller and Pastor Jeffers are on opposite ends of the financial spectrum and represent the disparate socioeconomic classes. Abundant Life (note the term “abundant”) is a state-of-the-art facility with giant TVs and live simulcasting of church services, while First Reformed is a tiny, dank building with a broken organ and creaking doors.

First Reformed church is referred to in a derogatory sense as “the souvenir shop” and is only seen as a tourist attraction due to its age and historical weight as a former refuge along the Underground Railroad. Much of the film builds towards a climax as the church is about to celebrate its 250 year anniversary and a major celebration is to be held with all the big-wigs in town. This, obviously, causes a rift as Balq Industries is a presence in the ceremony.

This may be hard to believe, but by the end of the movie we’re left with a ceremony full of people of importance and a pastor with a suicide bomb vest under his priestly garments. No, I’m not kidding.

The film has a defined agenda in disseminating the idea of the evil capitalistic, soulless upper-class as the reason for the downfall of our world. I hate to lay it out so blunt, but the film is so superficial in its intent that it can’t be ignored. In the end, the film decides that we have replaced faith with capitalism and we will suffer the consequences.

With all this being said, this is a good film. Ethan Hawke is great in his part and many of the theological discussions are interesting (even if the film goes out of its way to demonstrate the Bible is contradictory and paradoxical). The look of the film is bleak and muted, and presented in a rare aspect ratio of 1.37:1 so as not to create an enveloping world. It is supposed to push you back and make you think as opposed to engross you.

While the film has intentions of provoking thought and intellectual discourse, it comes to its own conclusions and removes much of the hypothetical from the conversation. It doesn’t ask a question and leave you to answer it, it asks the question and then slams you in the face with the agenda. I still want to think more, but overall I don’t agree with everything it has to say. See it for yourself, though. It’s worth it.

]]>https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/06/10/review-first-reformed-2018/feed/0first-reformed-770x506akiramifuneows_152778442013587first-reformed-movie-reviewMy Top 10 Movies from 2017https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/05/27/my-top-10-movies-from-2017/
https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/05/27/my-top-10-movies-from-2017/#respondSun, 27 May 2018 23:07:49 +0000http://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/?p=1874I’m well aware that we’re almost halfway through 2018 and I’m just now posting my favorites from 2017. So just save it!

I wanted to see as many movies from last as possible before I came up with this list so it could be more comprehensive. I made an effort to see as many of the most critically acclaimed films and the Oscar flicks, an effort which was mostly successful. Without further adieu, here’s the list:

10. Blade Runner 2049

9. John Wick: Chapter 2

8. Wind River

7. IT

6. The Shape of Water

5. mother!

4. The Killing of a Sacred Deer

3. Dunkirk

2. Call Me By Your Name

1. A Ghost Story

And to complete it, here’s the list of films I saw from 2017 that didn’t make the list.

]]>https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/05/27/my-top-10-movies-from-2017/feed/0dunkirk-tom-hardy-e1516716704156akiramifuneBlade-Runner-2049-Movie-Review5897ab5c0849ec25008b47b1-750-375windriver-jacket8229_it-movie-stephen-king-2image-ab8b4ea4-8a8a-4408-9fad-fe44303c32a1_copy_-_h_2017mother-review-round-uplead_960_540Untitled2018125143270507-ghost-story.w710.h4732nd Review: AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR (with spoilers)https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/04/28/2nd-review-avengers-infinity-war-with-spoilers/
https://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/2018/04/28/2nd-review-avengers-infinity-war-with-spoilers/#respondSat, 28 Apr 2018 21:44:20 +0000http://thisisyourbrainonfilm.com/?p=1863Now having seen Avengers: Infinity War for a second time I feel like I can more or less pinpoint some things that work and some things that don’t.

For obvious reasons, I will have to include some spoilers, so if you haven’t seen the movie do not read further.

YOU’VE BEEN WARNED – SPOILERS AHEAD

When I first learned about the run-time of the film (2 hrs – 40 mins) I was disappointed. While everyone was remarking about how this would be the longest Marvel movie thus far, I was thinking, “Is that enough time?” The short answer to the question is no. But, the answer to that question is dependent upon what you wanted from the film. I wanted a movie that would tell a complete tale. Now, we were told early on that this film and the next Avengers film would be linked, so it’s no real surprise that Infinity War is part one of a larger story.

THAT being said, if the plan all along was for this film to be part one, they dropped the ball in a couple places.

The ongoing complaint about MCU films has been the lack of a great villain. The first worthy antagonist was Loki in the Thor franchise and the first Avengers, and it wasn’t until Killmonger in Black Panther that we got another great one. The paramount strength of the MCU films has always been the heroes, and the casting of these heroes. And I’ve had the same argument every time I’ve read a complaint about the villain – the villain of every MCU film is the hero. Tony Stark is his own worst enemy in every film and there’s no villain that can compare to a superhero fighting their own inner demons. The antagonist’s main purpose, in a narrative sense, is to incite and complete the character arc of the protagonist.

The hero’s journey has always included winning an internal conflict in order to overcome the external one. And the previous films balance showing what the hero can do with what they can’t do. Thor is capable of winning nearly any battle with his magical hammer, but can he make the intelligent decision to put the hammer down when the fight calls for diplomacy? Black Panther has the resources and physical abilities to protect his country and prosper, but does he have the gumption to open these resources up to the world to protect people all over the world? These are the inner battles that occur within each character and they are the core element of what we love about these superheroes. Killmonger makes T’Challa realize he has failed as a hero and king. Each film tells a different story of inner struggle. Ant-Man has arguably the worst villain of any of the films, but aside from being a superficial physical threat, he has to be a catalyst for Scott Lang to prove he’s the man his daughter deserves as a father.

Which brings me to my first issue with Infinity War: it is comprised of pure external conflict. The film includes around two dozen superheroes and aside from Bruce Banner not being able to summon his inner Hulk, the internal conflicts are only alluded to. Doctor Strange and Tony Stark exchange remarks about each other’s egos, which has always been the obstacle for each character, but they don’t visualize this struggle in any contextual way. No hero has to make a choice that directly conflicts with their personalities or ideologies. Captain America puts his life on the line in the name of defending the universe. Black Panther fights to protect Wakanda. Thor wields a Titan-killing weapon to avenge the death of Loki at the hands of Thanos and to protect the universe. Spider-Man hangs on in the fight with Iron Man, Doctor Strange, Star-Lord, Drax, Mantis and Nebula because he wants to be part of the team and he’s a friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.

Characters are defined by the choices they make. At no point in any fight are we shown a moment where a character does something we did’t think they could or would normally do. At least, on an internal level. The fanboy/girl mentality is happy with watching the heroes use their abilities and the physical manifestation of their powers, and, believe me, that stuff is wonderful and fun to watch. But, narratively, the film feels like a shiny empty space without the internal conflict.

Which brings me back to my disappointment with the length of the film. With the breadth and scope of a film this size it wasn’t going to be possible to include all of the ideological conflicts, but it’s sad they weren’t able to include any. If the story is going to be stretched out over the length of two movies and (presumably) 5 hours of screen time, then there needed to be an existential struggle of some sort. At the end of the film we’re left with several dead heroes and a feeling of failure but there is no choice to point to as the reason to continue the story. What poor character decision needs to be rectified in the next film?

Now, where the film fails the heroes, it actually succeeds for the villain. Thanos is a top-notch antagonist and lives up to the moniker of The Mad Titan. His nazi-esque ideologies (exemplified when he actually has to retrieve the Soul Stone from the Red Skull) and inner grief at having to murder his daughter, Gamora, in order to “mercifully” save half the universe by erasing the other half, make him a fully realized being. He is both monster and man, just, perhaps, not in equal parts.

I spent about 70% of my second viewing just marveling at the complexity of the emotions of this character. Thanos is burdened with will. The star of the film is Josh Brolin and to say the mo-cap work is extraordinary is nothing short of underselling the actuality. There is pain and turmoil in this character and he has to do things he would rather not. You can see it in his face when Captain America holds off his attack with his bare hands during the final battle in Wakanda. Thanos pauses to look at him with respect and wonder, and then has to realize that, in order to complete his goal, he has to put Cap down.

It is Thanos who makes decisions that define him and it’s no surprise that the best scene in the film takes place on his decimated home planet, Titan, when he is ambushed by Iron Man, Doctor Strange, Spider-Man, Star-Lord, Drax, Nebula and Mantis (typing that sentence kind of made me giddy – shut up!) Using their collective powers, they manage to restrain Thanos, and Mantis subdues him, and the truest display of emotion in the entire film ensues. In the midst of trying to erase trillions of beings from existence, Thanos displays sorrow, anguish, and pain. As Mantis is narrating the inner workings of Thanos’ emotions, Star-Lord reacts with disdain, as if this “creature” could exhibit the complexity of an actual morality. When Thanos breaks free of the spell we see the anger in him that is a result of Mantis bringing those emotions out of him. You could say Infinity War is a Thanos film where the heroes are there just to hang on for dear life as this force of nature wields his will.

The most important part of Thanos isn’t just that he is a fully realized character who has his own moral compass, it’s what he does to the heroes. And I’m not referring to his physical power, which is far and away greater than that of any hero in the MCU (except maybe Captain Marvel? We’ll see!) What we really experience in watching these super beings interact within this war is fear. In the opening scene there is a brief clash between Hulk and Thanos, which is the fight most people were likely looking forward to somewhere in the final sequence. Thanos takes what Hulk gives him and then casually puts him down. Over the course of the previous films we have learned the two mightiest Avengers are Hulk and Thor, without question. The introduction of the film tells us neither of them are a match for Thanos and, hence, for the rest of the film Hulk is frightened and refuses to come out of Bruce. These scenes where Hulk refuses to come out despite Bruce begging him to are mostly played out for laughs, but it exemplifies a force that the Avengers have never really experienced. Nowhere in any film have we realized the level of fear these characters have.

As the film ends and we are left with this feeling of failure and disbelief that Thanos has completed his mission, it is the fear that persists. Tony gave everything he had and then watched Spider-Man be erased from existence in his arms. Cap watches Bucky turn to ash and knows what real fear is, as does Rocket when Groot is erased in front of his eyes. I have a feeling it will be this fear that fuels the team into the next film as they try to undo the catastrophe Thanos has caused.

When I left the theater after the first viewing I felt like most of the audience felt: disbelief and dismayed by the loss of so many characters and the defeat of our greatest heroes. But with a second watch I was able to complete some gaps that existed after the first watch. The film is nothing like we have ever seen in cinema before. It truly exists as a cog in a gigantic machine; an event film in a serialized medium. You cannot see this film without having seen every single one of the previous films, and as a result of the chaos caused in this story, the following films are must-see. The next movie is Ant-Man and TheWasp,followed by Captain Marvel, which we know from the end credits stinger will be of the utmost importance. The events of the previous films fueled the story of Infinity War, and the events of the next two films will tell a story that leads us to the next, untitled, Avengers film.

For now we’ll have to say Infinity War is a tremendous feat with some stunning events and an enormous narrative scope, but it’s incomplete. I’m not sure casual movie fans will appreciate this notion, but judgement has to be reserved for the completion of the story. What they created in Infinity War broke several boundaries we never knew Marvel would break, and the theories about how the story will be resolved will persist for the next year when Avengers 4 hits the theaters. Keeping the masses on the proverbial hook is a feat in and of itself, I just hope they have the balls to finish the story the right way.